about the linked article:
I, too, found the blanket statements about being a “bridge to youth” and being not negative in the majority of cases to be overbroad.
The author is certainly overreaching his case, for one simple, airtight reason: most “gerontophilic” relationships aren’t even positive! On average, they’re neutral: some positive, some negative, mostly a neutral expression of lust.* A relationship with an age group difference would probably tend to skew even more toward the negative.
However, should we, as a society, not only resist the (nearly inaudible) call for a blanket acceptance of these relationships, but also a blanket condemnation? I say, YES.
I would think that even in our sexually repressed, adult-dominated society**, there have been examples of positive or neutral adult-child sexual relationships. No cite, as others as well as the link have pointed out, that data is mucho difficult to come by due to legal reasons. And, to paraphrase another poster has said, the “Victims” who didnt percieve it negatively are not likely to seek legal redress.
However, there are two problems that must be addressed before we even think about changing our legal and social attitude to this. One, we need to lose our remaining inhibitions about sexuality. If we do not teach children that sexuality is dirty, they would be more likely to expose a person taking advantage of them. Granted, at that point, due to social change, it would not be as bad a scar as it is now, but a violation of ethics and freedom will always be a violation.
Two, we need to nearly completely eliminate the advantages of age in our society. How we do this, I don’t know, but as the Supreme Court opinion re: pornography goes, I’ll know it when I see it. If we don’t have a cult of adulthood, and especially parenthood, we will not have children willing to accept things secretly with adults because they’re the parent/teacher/etc.
Would it be right to do both of these things? Who knows: that isn’t the point of the post. i’m just saying those are requirements. Once we reach that point, if we feel it is right to re-explore the age limits for sexual expression we would be right in doing so.
But now, as a society, it would be bad to allow such contact as too much potential for harm exists.
Oh, and one thing we must do, is stop condemning those who do not express their desires, but merely have a different sexual orientation than others.
[the following is to be taken in an evolutionary context, not in a moral context]
I believe that, like homosexuality, it arises due to selective pressures (like homosexuality, as a “genetic helper” and a population control issue, with the addition “bridge to youth” factor, with the caveat that it would be simplistic to call all sexual relationships positive).
In addition, there is the selective pressure to select one’s partner based on potential productivity: in the old old days, one usually dies before 35. Therefore, if our biological “age tuner” caused us to seek mainly those 25-35, they would only have 5 years on average productivity, despite their gender, due to death in general. But if it’s set to average 15-20, most object of desire would be healthy and with more years of productivity ahead of them.
And in certain situations, one would want to delay this, or push it up. When you want a healthier population, it would desireable to push back relationships due to health reasons. But when you want population increase, a younger onset is desired. So we probably have conflicting desires bred into us. Now, should we condemn those whose “age control” is set just a bit low for our tastes?
In addition, if assuming an actual, positive relationship, it may be better to have a relationship between a 17 and 10 year old than one between a 17 and 30 year old, as that 30 year old is likely 5 years from death. Whereas the 10 year old likely has 15 productive years in store. A negative relationship would not be as good, ON AVERAGE, as they would be just as likely to leave you, unless you had a large social power in the tribe, as they would be to internalize the situation and knuckle to your every desire. But a positive relationship could blossom into a full-fledged lifetime love.
*My personal experience bears this out: nearly every person who has expressed sexual desire for me as an adult, even if they LIKE me, did not do it BECAUSE they like me, but because they needed a sexual release. I classify this as neutral, as they would (probably) be happy to stop if I asked them to.
**Our society is much less repressed and adult-dominated than almost any other in history, but much more than is possible.